Charlie, Muhammad, and the Saudi 1000 Lashes of Raif Badawi

"My commitment is... to reject any repression in the name of religion... a goal we will reach in a peaceful and law-abiding way." — Raif Badawi.

If he ever leaves prison, his life will have been destroyed -- by voyeurs as sexually twisted as those of ancient Rome.

"Our Prophet," Malik said, "would have been crystal clear and unequivocal in condemning [the Charlie Hebdo massacre]. But his statement points out why there is a problem. Malik was -- quite innocently, I am sure -- completely wrong. Muhammad did the same thing – many, many times.

Today we all are Charlie, and we are all Raif.

His first 50 lashes were administered Friday. After the noon prayers, outside the mosque, Saudi writer and blogger Raif Badawi, 30, received a sentence perhaps worse than death. Accused of "insulting Islam," he is to receive 1000 lashes: 50 per week for 20 weeks -- nearly half a year. "The lashing order says Raif should 'be lashed very severely,'" a twitter notice read. "If they lash him again next week we do not know if he is going to survive. He has no medical assistance," another notice said.

After that, he is to spend ten years in prison and pay a fine of $266,000. If he ever leaves prison, his life will have been destroyed -- by voyeurs as sexually twisted as those of ancient Rome.

His wife and three children have been given asylum in Canada. Her family has filed for divorce on the grounds of his supposed apostasy.

Raif Badawi and his children.

His crime is said to have been "insulting Islam." Badawi had written, "My commitment is... to reject any repression in the name of religion... a goal that we will reach in a peaceful, law-abiding way."

He is alleged to have criticized the Wahhabi clergy who run his country hand in hand with the royal family.[1] Muslims seem not to be able to handle questions, reasoned criticism or satire. Perhaps where many come from, there is only one opinion -- the dominant majority one. If there are more, as there are, there seems a wish to stamp them out. Here in the West, a major role of government is to protect the minority from the majority.

The day before, January 8, 2015, just after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, BBC News in London broadcast a report that contained short interviews with a number of moderate Muslims who decried the attack and feared repercussions on their own communities.[2]

One of the interviewees was Nadeem Malik, the UK Director of the Bahu Trust, a Sufi Muslim charity that "espouses the virtues of tolerance, peaceful co-existence and equality." Malik said: "Our Prophet would have been absolutely crystal clear and unequivocal in condemning any such action. That's not in the name of Islam at all, and Muslims are sick of having their faith hijacked in this manner."

I do not doubt Mr. Malik's sincerity, and I respect the Islamic tradition (Barelwi) from which he comes as one more in keeping with a non-violent interpretation. But his statement sharply points out why there is a problem. He was -- quite innocently, I am sure -- completely wrong.

There is an inspiration for attacks like those on writers, cartoonists, and film-makers: France's Charlie Hebdo journalists; Amsterdam's Theo van Gogh; Denmark's Kurt Westergaard, Carsten Juste, and Flemming Rose, and Sweden's Lars Vilks -- as well as the assassination attempt on the Nobel Prize winning Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz and the fatwa for the murder of the British writer Salman Rushdie. The inspiration for this behavior is not that the Prophet Muhammad was lampooned or criticized or mocked. The inspiration for this behavior is that Muhammad himself would have ordered or approved such attacks as revenge for assaults on his honour.

How can one make such an outrageous suggestion? The answer is that Muhammad did exactly the same thing -- many, many times. This may appear to be an Islamophobic calumny, perhaps something concocted by medieval churchmen in Europe (who did make up some fancy legends about Muhammad), but it is solidly recorded in the almost canonical biography of the Prophet by Ibn Hisham and in the canonical collections of prophetic traditions (hadith) by Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.[3]

Shortly after his move from Mecca to Medina in 622 CE, for instance, when he became the effective ruler of the town, opponents emerged in the Jewish and wider communities. Poets wrote lampoons and disrespectful verses. Muhammad had them killed. Not just poets, but almost anyone who disagreed with him and his "revelations."

In 624, for example, a Jewish poet named Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf wrote verses condemning the killing of notables from Mecca. He later became a one-man Charlie Hebdo, writing obscene and erotic verses about the Muslim women. Muhammad took offense and instructed one of his companions, Muhammad ibn Maslama, to assassinate Ka'b. When Ibn Maslama expressed doubts about having to lie to Ka'b in order to trick him into going with him, Muhammad told him lying was permissible for such purposes. Ibn Maslama and some other Muslims went out with Ka'b under false pretenses and murdered him.

Ka'b ibn al-Ahraf was not Muhammad's only victim. The poets Asma' bint Marwan (a woman), Abu Afak, and Al-Nadir ibn al-Harith, and Abu Rafi' ibn Abi Al-Huqaiq were all assassinated in the same year for the same offence of mockery. In the next few years, several other poets were killed, such as Abdullah ibn Zib'ari, Al-Harith bin al-Talatil, Hubayra, Ka'b ibn Zuhayr ibn Abi Sulama, and Huwayrith ibn Nafidh. Abdullah bin Khatal and two of his slave girls were murdered for having recited poems insulting the Prophet. There is a list in WikiIslam of 43 people -- as well as all the men from the Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza -- who were killed on Muhammad's orders or whose murders were sanctioned by him.

Today the lashes of Raif Badawi stand with the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo as further symbols of the determination of many extremists to reject the norms of reason, tolerance, pluralism, equality, the Universal Declaration human rights and the value that begins every chapter but one of the Qur'an: mercy.

Some people ask what inspires those who kill authors, cartoonists and journalists, while others insist that it has nothing to do with Islam. If we do not learn, if our leaders do not learn, what hope is there for us?

Today, we are all Charlie. And we are all Raif.

Denis MacEoin is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute and a former university lecturer in Arabic and Islamic Studies.

[1] The Al al-Shaykh are descendants of Wahhabi founder Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (1703-1792), who allied himself and his puritan belief system with the Al Sa'ud, an Arabian family with pretensions to grandeur.

Comment on this item

Name:

Email Address:

Comments:

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Gatestone Institute greatly appreciates your comments. The editors reserve the right, however, not to publish comments containing: incitement to violence, profanity, or any broad-brush slurring of any race, ethnic group or religion. Gatestone also reserves the right to edit comments for length, clarity and grammar. All thoughtful suggestions and analyses will be gratefully considered. Commenters' email addresses will not be displayed publicly. Gatestone regrets that, because of the increasingly great volume of traffic, we are not able to publish them all.

15 Reader Comments

Laurence Odhner • Mar 21, 2015 at 19:30

I doubt that the Saudi government would accept my offer, however, I would gladly offer myself to the lash and spare Raif.

He is a young man of 30, and with beautiful little children. I am a 67-year-old man and have lived a full life. If Islam demands blood, take mine.

Reply->

Ardy • Mar 7, 2015 at 17:41

If Western countries' governments do not protest against the barbaric treatment of Raif Badawi, they once again repeat their behaviour pattern when Jews were herded into, maltreated and murdered in the Nazi concentration camp. Well before the freeing of concentration camps by Russian troops, the barbaric treatment of Jews, Gypsies, and dissidents in general was known and few if any countries raised any formal protest, some closed their borders to refugees, too few took them in. The Holy See even made a concordat with Adolph Hitler about mutual non-interference in each others' state affairs. Perhaps strong formal protests might have changed the course of events. But too, if any were formally launched at a time when such could still have influenced the Nazi government, i.e. prior to and immediately following the « Kristallnacht ».

Even though Raif Badawi is only one person who is subjected to an absurdly brutal condemnation and punishment for an act – championing free speech – that we in the democratic world consider a self-evident right, have recently come to attention, isn't it time that at least those governments whose people experienced and still remember the full terror and suffering brutal regimes imposed on their citizens – the Nazis, the Khmer Rouge, the Serbs, to mention but the probably best known – now speak up and let, in this case Saudi Arabia know, that such anachronistic and barbaric behaviour is not only not tolerated but entails diplomatic consequences? Where are the formal protests of Germany, France, Spain, Russia, Israel, Serbia, who perpetrated, or themselves suffered under, political and social despotism ? Where do the United States stand who usually sees itself as a beacon of democracy, free speech and social justice?

Reply->

Dennis Trisker • Jan 13, 2015 at 01:13

He is a brave man. Somehow he should know that we support him. The US govt is only interested in petroleum, not people. I feel helpless in not helping him! He is taking the lashes for all of us!

Reply->

John MacArthur • Jan 12, 2015 at 05:02

Three million French people out on the street yesterday should send a signal to the Saudis and other monarchically exceptionalist regimes that they are not going to be able to get away with subjugation through Islam or any other religion for ever. Time Islam had a reformation and returned to the people to whom it was given.

Reply->

Robert Arthur Gillis • Jan 11, 2015 at 12:54

Raif Badawi's public 'Lashing' by decree of the Saudi Monotheocratic Regime, is totally reprehensible, and predictably, - there will be a well warranted retribution against the Regime for its Barbaric and Inhumane edict and action!

Reply->

Dwight • Jan 11, 2015 at 11:08

Much is written about the incompatibility of honor/shame societies with the democratic values and Judeo-Christian presuppositions of Western civilization.

It appears as though Raif embodies our Western identity of dignity/humility. Honor can be taken or acquired (like the spoils of conquest); but dignity and its humility are a monogamous mystery which cannot be taken or acquired by the Qu'ran and its Shari'ah (even through its tyrannies and depravities in extremis).

The insatiable honor of Arabia's Ummah cannot successfully co-exist with the individual dignity of the West (no matter how earnestly it tries). Sooner or later its honor becomes enraged by that dignity that it cannot acquire (and by that true humility that cares not in the least for it).

The lashes of Arabia that purpose to disembody Raif's dignity are coming to a public square near you, O dar al-harb. Surrender your dignity, and submit to Muhammad.

Reply->

Carl • Jan 11, 2015 at 10:50

Are the Saudis really our allies? If it were not for their oil, would we even care about them? I guess one of our Philadelphia crooked politicians had it correct when he stated " Money talks and BS walks"

Reply->

Mike Briggs • Jan 11, 2015 at 10:41

Raif Badawi is just the latest of many thousands of examples of how the US does not lead the world for the betterment of the human race...but allows...and oft times abets... the transcendence of pure evil!Decades ago we should have opened our own public lands to oil and gas exploration in accordance with our best 'Free Market' traditions. By now we would be energy independent and infinitely more prosperous! And all these Middle Eastern dictatorships who totally depend on our petro dollars would be light years more humanitarian with their own people and absolutely not supporting 'Islamic Jihad' all around the world!

Reply->

Phil N • Jan 11, 2015 at 10:36

Have you noticed that whenever we talk of human rights, especially religious freedom, we always give Saudi Arabia a pass. We are willing to spend billions to undermine less repressive regimes in Syria and Libya while paying homage to the tyrants of Saudi Arabia and their fellow Gulf autocrats. We spend billions protecting these backward thugs while mouthing all sorts of propaganda of rights and freedom.

Reply->

Deniz Appelbaum Phil N • Jan 12, 2015 at 23:49

Plus, in August of 2014, the Kingdom publicly beheaded 23 people, for such crimes as apostasy and adultery. Then the bodies were strung up high off of a crane in the public squares (tied from under the armpits) with the heads in plastic bags. This is their way of instilling fear and terror in the populace.

The case of Raif Badawi is especially horrifying, as normally the whipper is supposed to hold a Koran between his chest and the upper arm of the arm used to mete the punishment, so that the whipping isn't too severe (if there could be such a thing). In this case they are not following the Kingdom's own laws! Basically they are slowly torturing him to death in public! The Middle Ages = The Modern Age!

Reply->

khaki hanson • Jan 11, 2015 at 09:16

I agree "What hope is there for Us?" if we do not learn, if our leaders do not learn from the killing of cartoonists, authors & poets, the answer is simple. NO HOPE! I might add what hope is there for us if we do not learn from the unopposed slaughter of an entire town in Baga Nigeria. Just simple, unassuming people not claiming anything other than wanting to exist & raise families. These people do not claim any kind of status that might be associated with the title "cartoonist, "author" or "poet", just members of the human race. So, the question may more aptly be phrased, "When do we learn?"

Reply->

Carolyn • Jan 11, 2015 at 08:02

Raif is the kind of person I would welcome in to the west. If only the extremists would go back to their country of origin and stay there!

Reply->

Jonathan Usher • Jan 11, 2015 at 07:40

The problem is that both peace and war and violence and prejudice can be found in the Koran and the hadith so that there is lots of support in Islam for all of the bad stuff. Once there is support for doing evil, evil men will find it and do the suggested evil. Islam then becomes the source or justification for evil actions. Bringing Muslims into France therefore is bringing an ideology that includes encouragement to violence etc into France. That cannot be good for France.

Reply->

El Cid Jonathan Usher • Jan 11, 2015 at 08:23

The article highlights that, on the one hand, extra-judicial Islamic sentences carried out in the West are sensational, called terrorism, and denied as "true Islam", whereas, Islamic sentences carried out under Islamic governments is hardly even news.

Where are the peaceful Muslims around the world marching in solidarity with the poor man in Saudi Arabia? Thousands took to the streets to support Hamas during the last war with Israel.

Judging by their inaction, we must conclude the Western Muslims are OK with Saudi law.

Reply->

DAVID M. Jonathan Usher • Jan 11, 2015 at 12:50

Because we have been so dependent on Saudi oil for so many years that anachronistic kingdom has been coddled, protected, and quietly obeyed. Recall our US Presidents bowing and scraping (as simple courtesy they all said) to Saudi kings.

But it is the firm lock on Saudi royalty held by the radical, fundamentalist Wahabbis that is the root of its power in the Umma! The Wahabbis have sponsored and paid for, the radical training grounds of the Madrasas around the Muslim world. In these archaic "schools" young boys from Muslim families are trained by rote in the Wahabbi version of Islam.

Until this quiet intellectual corruption ends, we can expect Saudi royalty to not control (wink, wink) anything this group wants. It has money, support from great wealth, and a philosophy of hatred and contempt towards every other world religion.